Question · asked by 1 review

GTR rm + CAF vs GTR nrm + CAF: Occurrence of adverse effects or postoperative complications

Population
Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)
Intervention
GTR rm + CAF
Comparison
GTR nrm + CAF
Outcome
Occurrence of adverse effects or postoperative complications

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
GTR rm + CAF vs GTR nrm + CAF
Occurrence of adverse effects or postoperative complications · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm) · Short term (6 to 12 months)
Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects (2018) · Cochrane All outcomes
Roccuzzo 1996: membrane exposure reported between the first and second weeks of healing1 studyGRADE not reported

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects
2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
15 January 2018Not listedNot assessed

The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.

How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.